optional dep for gcc-4.4.x

[boloco]

Now gcc can make use of cloog and ppl

[bdubbs@…]

I never heard of either of these. Can you give me a URL?

[boloco]

Replying to bdubbs@…:

I never heard of either of these. Can you give me a URL?

​http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Graphite

[boloco]

GCC-4.4 is released with graphite. Looks like there are new configure options, to build graphite with gcc , like these: --with-ppl=PATH --with-cloog=PATH

[willimm]

I don't see any package that requires GCC's Graphite right now, and if we go this route, we have to add G++ as a requirement and seperate GMP and MPFR from the build in CH5.

[willimm]

Replying to willimm:

I don't see any package that requires GCC's Graphite right now, and if we go this route, we have to add G++ as a requirement and seperate GMP and MPFR from the build in CH5.

In other words, it's not worth the trouble. Please close this ticket.

[bdubbs@…]

Looking at ​http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html, other optional packages are libelf and MPC in addition to PPL/CLooG.

All these libraries allow for certain optimizations. I am of the mind to add them because they to apply to C code in general even though none of the packages we currently build use them (AFAIK).

We should probably wait until GCC-4.5 is released (probably around March) and add these if they are not already included in GCC at that time.

[Matthew Burgess]

Note that MPC will be a mandatory dependency of GCC-4.5 (see ​http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-10/msg00608.html).

[ken@…]

FWIW, I'm reluctant to comment on this ticket until I've built an up to date LFS system, but at this stage I will say that I'd prefer *not* to have any of these packages until they are proved to be either required or useful.

For me, one of the things I hope to do in my next build is establish the overhead from adding cloog and ppl (my last clfs build had them, and my impression, perhaps wrongly, is that they just make compiles slower and don't - if actually used - bring any benefits in my usage).

Of course, people with multiprocessor or large systems might have different experiences - I continue to stick with uniprocessor x86_64 cpus and generally try to minimize my electricity usage.

[bdubbs@…]

I don't know yet if we'll implement this or close it, but I'm moving to 6.6 so we will be sure to consider it as we get closer to the next release.

[Matthew Burgess]

My preference on these would be to mention them in the optional dependencies in Appendix C and leave it at that for now. We'll put them in the book proper once GCC-4.5 is out and requires them.

[Matthew Burgess]

Trivial patch to add optional deps

[Matthew Burgess]

Fixed in r9177.